Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, walks to a closed Republican strategy session at the Capitol in December. / J. Scott Applewhite, AP

by Alan Draper , USA TODAY

by Alan Draper , USA TODAY

Little wonder there have been no new breakout dramas on television or Broadway this season. None could compete with the spectacle of the Republican Party's meltdown following their defeat in November.

The shock and extent of their defeat sent them through the five stages of grief, beginning with denial. First they claimed the election was a split decision because the GOP still retained its majority in the House of Representatives. Or they argued that Obama's victory was illusory because the map of the U.S. was covered more in red than in blue, as if a state's square mileage mattered more than its number of Electoral College votes.

Denial then gave way to anger in which Republicans credited Obama's victory to Democrats excelling at the dark arts of politics. Sean Hannity, the Fox News and conservative talk radio host, attributed Mitt Romney's defeat to the fact that the Democrats "knew no boundaries when it came to lying, demonizing, slandering, smearing, besmirching [and] attacking" him.

This was followed quickly by the next three stages of grief. There was bargaining, in which Republicans attempted to negotiate with the administration in the fiscal cliff debate in December as if nothing had changed and the election had never happened. Then depression, in which they wallowed in self-abasement, lamenting they can no longer afford to be the "stupid party" as Louisiana's Republican Governor Bobby Jindal put it. Finally there was acceptance, when the GOP acknowledged that a majority of Americans had cast their ballots for Obama. Again.

Once Republicans completed the grieving process civil war broke out. Conservative and moderate Republicans now are raising competing war chests to use against each other in upcoming primaries. Party discipline within the Republican Conference in the House of Representatives has collapsed.

Some Republicans are recalculating where their self-interest lies. They had perceived their self-interest as voting with their party to defend conservative principles, but the 2012 election broke their confidence and spirit. They read the demographic and value shifts the 2012 election revealed - more singles, more minorities, more socially tolerant voters - and have come to the conclusion they need to be in front of these changes or be steamrolled by them. They fear the Republican brand is becoming so toxic in their home districts that it endangers their chances for re-election.

Their political calculus is evident in three recent congressional votes. A minority of Republicans joined with Democrats on January 1 to vote to stave off the fiscal cliff through retention of the Bush tax cuts for all but the wealthy. This broke the GOP's informal "Hastert rule," that the party would not bring a bill to the floor if it did not have majority support within the Republican House Conference.

Two weeks later, a minority of Republicans again joined House Democrats to pass a supplemental aid bill to assist communities devastated by superstorm Sandy. A week after that a majority of Republicans required Democratic help in order to get enough votes to pass a bill raising the debt limit.

This is all new. Polarization and party discipline are out and bipartisanship and appealing to the median voter are in. The outlines of the conflict within the Republican Party run imperfectly along the Mason-Dixon line, with non-southern Republicans more likely to re-interpret their political interest and defect.

Southern Republicans are the conservative core of the GOP. But they need non-southern Republicans to retain their seats so that the party can keep its majority in the House, which permits the GOP to control its committees and agenda. But non-southern GOP defections now prevent the southern wing of the party from translating its preferences and power into policy.

It was not too long ago that Democrats suffered similarly, although regions and victims have been reversed. When Democrats were in the majority for nearly the entire 1932-1996 period, southern Democrats-Dixiecrats-would often defect. They would cross the aisle to vote with Republicans to block civil rights, labor, and welfare state legislation, and thereby thwart the liberal preferences of their party's northern wing.

It is a delicious irony of politics that Republicans, conservatives, and the South are now victims of the same strategy that previously frustrated liberals from the North when Democrats were in the majority. Non-southern Republicans now ally with Democrats to thwart southern Republicans from legislating their conservative agenda just like southern Democrats once voted with the GOP to prevent northern Democrats from legislating their liberal agenda.

What goes around comes around in politics, if you wait long enough.

Alan Draper is professor of government at St. Lawrence University.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors.